The birth of a child was in great need in the ancient Roman world. For the upper class, there was more of a stress on this necessity as the upper class has a pressure to continue their family line through their children. However, the survival rate of a child during those times was not high, which provides reason for parent’s lack of attachment for the first week of the child’s birth (Dixon, 100). Since there was a low survival rate, the woman’s role in the family was to continuously be pregnant and produce children (Rawson, 10). The importance of doing so allows the estates of the wealthy to stay in the family and not break apart.
If a newborn survives past the eight to nine day mark of their life, a midwife must inspect the child, place them on the ground, and certify that the child is “correct” (rectus) (Rawson, 11). At this point, the parents and families throw a celebration in honor of their newborn child especially since this occasion did not come often. In addition, the parents will give the newborn a name. Although the child regardless of sex was a joyous event, birthing a son was valued more than having a daughter. The son could continue the family name while a daughter does not do much for the family if she is unmarried. Moreover, if she was married, her primary job was the produced children as mentioned above. Since daughters were less valued, sometimes their names would be more impersonal being named after their father with numbers following the name (Mellor, 103).
Bringing in a child into the world for the wealthy or the well off is not a financial issue. On the other hand, for people of poverty, they may be fortunate enough to have a child survive after birth; however, the family may not be able to afford to keep them. Therefore, families would abandon their infants or if born from a slave, the owner of the slaves would take care of the infant. With this, there was uncertainty with who exactly has custody of the children or even if the children have free status.
For the time being, the child would have foster-parents that cared for the child until they got older. There were referred to as alumni, which meant persons nurtured by someone else. There was much controversy over citizenship of a child. This usually was associated with wills and estates. If the child were freeborn when transferred over to the foster-parents, they would not have access for the child’s property (Rawson 172-4). There is evidence of foster families bonding with their alumni and cared deeply for them.
Daily Life
Education
Depending on social class determined how far a child might go in their education. In upper class families, children had the opportunity to receive an education. Aristocratic families would hire private tutors for their children. However, there was still an elementary school for other families as well. At school, the children would go to learn writing, reading, and mathematics. Books were rare because they were expensive to have during the time; therefore, the children would learn in the form of memorizing and chanting what they learned. In addition, children would write on waxed tablets with styluses, which allowed them to erase their work and use the tablet again. (Mellor, 104).
In Rome, it was ideal for parents to be heavily involved in their children’s upbringing. More specifically, parents would be responsible to teach their children the necessary skills to succeed in society. Parents would be expected to keep in constant communication with teachers with their child’s progress. When old enough, Roman parents would send their young boys to experts to learn skills of oratory, the law or the military. Although wealthy families could afford to send their children off to learn with someone else, it was traditionally respected to teach their children themselves (Dixon, 116-7). This created a closer relationship with fathers and sons as well as mothers and daughters.
For poor, children would shadow their parents in whatever technical work their family was involved. Children in this class would learn about agriculture, the family trade, or apprentice out to learn a new trade with a family friend (Dixon 117). Children of poverty would have a shorten childhood because of this. They would have jobs and work as young as age nine. They would work in shops as assistance and messengers. Schooling ended for girls at the young age of eleven since the next step for them was preparing to be married. This went for the wealthy as well as the poor (Mellor 104-5).
Games & Toys
Roman children played with many of the toys, which children of the modern world play. They would play with dolls, toy soldiers, and use walnuts like marbles as well as balls, hoops and sticks (Mellor, 104). Dolls were made with wood, clay, ivory and bone. Young girls would be able to dress their dolls with clothing and play with them, as they liked.
Roman children would run around and play a simple game of tag or a Roman version of leapfrog. Furthermore, they would play with coins to guess about heads or tails. Children would play other various games of risk with dice, coins and walnuts like mentioned above (Evans, 167-8).
About half of Roman children were likely to survive childhood. Laurence found that it was likely that parents would not have close personal attachment to their child as they knew of this survival rate. Younger children were less likely to have formal funeral rituals than older children. In addition, families would not have the necessary funds to provide for the funeral rituals. However, the wealthy would splurge on funerary monuments for those they truly cared for (refer to image to the right).
Children in Ancient Rome
Table of Contents
Early Childhood
Birth & Infancy
The birth of a child was in great need in the ancient Roman world. For the upper class, there was more of a stress on this necessity as the upper class has a pressure to continue their family line through their children. However, the survival rate of a child during those times was not high, which provides reason for parent’s lack of attachment for the first week of the child’s birth (Dixon, 100). Since there was a low survival rate, the woman’s role in the family was to continuously be pregnant and produce children (Rawson, 10). The importance of doing so allows the estates of the wealthy to stay in the family and not break apart.If a newborn survives past the eight to nine day mark of their life, a midwife must inspect the child, place them on the ground, and certify that the child is “correct” (rectus) (Rawson, 11). At this point, the parents and families throw a celebration in honor of their newborn child especially since this occasion did not come often. In addition, the parents will give the newborn a name. Although the child regardless of sex was a joyous event, birthing a son was valued more than having a daughter. The son could continue the family name while a daughter does not do much for the family if she is unmarried. Moreover, if she was married, her primary job was the produced children as mentioned above. Since daughters were less valued, sometimes their names would be more impersonal being named after their father with numbers following the name (Mellor, 103).
Adoption
Bringing in a child into the world for the wealthy or the well off is not a financial issue. On the other hand, for people of poverty, they may be fortunate enough to have a child survive after birth; however, the family may not be able to afford to keep them. Therefore, families would abandon their infants or if born from a slave, the owner of the slaves would take care of the infant. With this, there was uncertainty with who exactly has custody of the children or even if the children have free status.For the time being, the child would have foster-parents that cared for the child until they got older. There were referred to as alumni, which meant persons nurtured by someone else. There was much controversy over citizenship of a child. This usually was associated with wills and estates. If the child were freeborn when transferred over to the foster-parents, they would not have access for the child’s property (Rawson 172-4). There is evidence of foster families bonding with their alumni and cared deeply for them.
Daily Life
Education
Depending on social class determined how far a child might go in their education. In upper class families, children had the opportunity to receive an education. Aristocratic families would hire private tutors for their children. However, there was still an elementary school for other families as well. At school, the children would go to learn writing, reading, and mathematics. Books were rare because they were expensive to have during the time; therefore, the children would learn in the form of memorizing and chanting what they learned. In addition, children would write on waxed tablets with styluses, which allowed them to erase their work and use the tablet again. (Mellor, 104).In Rome, it was ideal for parents to be heavily involved in their children’s upbringing. More specifically, parents would be responsible to teach their children the necessary skills to succeed in society. Parents would be expected to keep in constant communication with teachers with their child’s progress. When old enough, Roman parents would send their young boys to experts to learn skills of oratory, the law or the military. Although wealthy families could afford to send their children off to learn with someone else, it was traditionally respected to teach their children themselves (Dixon, 116-7). This created a closer relationship with fathers and sons as well as mothers and daughters.
For poor, children would shadow their parents in whatever technical work their family was involved. Children in this class would learn about agriculture, the family trade, or apprentice out to learn a new trade with a family friend (Dixon 117). Children of poverty would have a shorten childhood because of this. They would have jobs and work as young as age nine. They would work in shops as assistance and messengers. Schooling ended for girls at the young age of eleven since the next step for them was preparing to be married. This went for the wealthy as well as the poor (Mellor 104-5).
Games & Toys
Roman children played with many of the toys, which children of the modern world play. They would play with dolls, toy soldiers, and use walnuts like marbles as well as balls, hoops and sticks (Mellor, 104). Dolls were made with wood, clay, ivory and bone. Young girls would be able to dress their dolls with clothing and play with them, as they liked.Roman children would run around and play a simple game of tag or a Roman version of leapfrog. Furthermore, they would play with coins to guess about heads or tails. Children would play other various games of risk with dice, coins and walnuts like mentioned above (Evans, 167-8).
Death & Funeral Rituals
About half of Roman children were likely to survive childhood. Laurence found that it was likely that parents would not have close personal attachment to their child as they knew of this survival rate. Younger children were less likely to have formal funeral rituals than older children. In addition, families would not have the necessary funds to provide for the funeral rituals. However, the wealthy would splurge on funerary monuments for those they truly cared for (refer to image to the right).Bibliography
Bust of a Boy named Martial, Roman, c.98-117 CE. The J. Paul Getty Museum at the Getty Villa, Malibu, CA.. © Seelypon Phanthip.
Dixon, Suzanne. The Roman family. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Univ Pr, 1992. Print.
Evans, John K. War, women, and children in ancient Rome. New York, NY: Routledge, 1991. 166-70. Print.
Grave Monument of a Girl, Roman, c. 120-140 CE. The J. Paul Getty Museum at the Getty Villa, Malibu, CA.. © Seelypon Phanthip.
Laurence, Ray. "Childhood in the Roman Empire."History Today 55.10 (2005): n. pag. EBSCOhost. Web. 27 Jun 2011.
Mellor, Ronald, and Marni McGee. The Ancient Roman World. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, USA, 2004. 103-5. Print.
Rawson, Beryl. The Family in Ancient Rome: New Perspectives. New York, NY: Cornell Univ Pr, 1987. Print.
Rawson, Beryl. Marriage, divorce, and children in ancient Rome. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, USA, 1996. Print.